Talk:Epsilon Eridani system

Examples

Some examples of discrepencies would be appreciated.--Rot 2101 7.12.06

I would like to point something out, however. I believe the author of this article confuses the Epsilon Eridani System with the Eridanus System at several points. I will make edits to correct this.--Rot 1549 11.12.06

Cos I just don't see how the Covenant would jump into Reaches system, glass a possible Gas Giant (somehow) and then leave without noticing Reach.Forerunner 07:19, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I suggest a cleanup.Forerunner 07:19, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Eridanus Secundus NOT in Epsilon Eridani

Think about it. The Ascendant Justice HAD to be in a different star system when it arrived at Eridanus Secundus. Otherwise, what would've happened? The Covenant would have detected them the second they came out of Slipspace, made a pinpoint jump lasting seconds, leaving Whitcombe and his crew no time for having tea with Governor Jiles, arrived with dozens of ships instead of one (as in the book), and burned them out of the sky within seconds. Eridanus Secundus is not in Epsilon Eridani.--The All-knowing Sith'ari 20:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Star Systems are large places, spanning millions of kilometers. Reach may have been on one side, while Eridanus II could have been on the other. Or one was further in the system than the other. But Contact Harvest makes it very clear that they're the same systems. -- CoH|Councillor]] Specops306 - Kora 'Morhek 22:07, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

We know very well that the Covenant can make very fast, pinpoint slipspace jumps through systems spanning millions of kilometres. And beside, where in Contact Harvest does it say they're in the same systems?The All-knowing Sith'ari 19:36, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

• I wonder why he hasn't responded yet...You should probably read the page Eridanus II before replying.--The All-knowing Sith'ari 19:32, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

I didn't reply because I haven't checked the page. The Fall of Reach explicitly states that Eridanus II was a part of Operation TREBUCHET, which Contact Harvest also states took place in the Epsilon Eridani System. The logical conclusion is that Eridanus II is part of the Epsilon Eridani star system. -- Administrator Specops306 - Qur'a 'Morhek ^{Honour Light Your Way!} 03:51, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Curiously enough, Epsilon Eridani is constantly referred to as "Epsilon Eridanus" in Contact Harvest. And yes, they're treated like they were the same system, although this wasn't the case in the Fall of Reach. It was clear that they were separate systems at the time. Maybe it's a retcon? Maybe Staten wanted to just clear it up because a star system called "Eridanus" doesn't even really exist. A constellation by the name does, though. --Jugus 04:42, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Apparent or Absolute?

Maybe this is a template question but why is Apparent Magnitude used in the informational box instead of Absolute Magnitude? Absolute Magnitude would be far more meaningful, would it not? Apparent magnitude refers only to the brightness a star in the sky appears to be as measured from Earth. Not terribly helpful and quite Earth-centric. It's more meaningful to use Absolute Magnitude, where a star's brightness can be directly compared to another star regardless of distance or brightness from Earth because the measure is the star's brightness at a consistent, fixed distance from the observer (10 parsecs (~32 light years). This way, the brightness means something when relating it to other stars. Just a curiosity as to why one was used over the other. ScaleMaster117 (talk) 16:45, 7 October 2013 (EDT)

Not so sure why. If it is any consolation, the template is terribly outdated (going back to '07) and serves little to no purpose at all. Most likely the template will be removed from all articles and deleted from the wiki. Soon^TM — subtank 21:25, 7 October 2013 (EDT)

I would expect anything that's repetitious would be templated, like weapons, characters, stars, planets, etc. I wouldn't trash the template, but if it needs updating, figure out what sort of data would be handy to track. -ScaleMaster117 (talk) 22:50, 7 October 2013 (EDT)

I agree that the infobox can still be useful as long as it's updated. It conveys basic information more quickly than the article proper and has some info bits that aren't in the article itself. A template like this is hardly a problem in itself; many reputable wikis like Wookieepedia go way further than us and have infoboxes for things like armor and generic objects and their quality hardly suffers because of it. --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 23:35, 7 October 2013 (EDT)